Accrington Web - View Single Post - forget the terrorists, this is worse

Acrylic-bob · 17-08-2005, 19:37

I can accept mistaken identity right up until the moment when the young chap was challenged on the train and the officer sitting next to him pinned his arms to his side. It would have been a relatively simple matter then to take him off the train and find out who he was. But to shoot an already restrained suspect eleven times from extreme close range - and miss three times - does not strike me as a reasoned and measured response. One shot to the head from close range is enough to kill or severely disable anyone. Eleven shots speaks more of unreasoning and murderous frenzy.

Think about it: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven shots! To stop one man, not two feet away?

Much has been made of the sense of heightened tension in the days following the bombings as a means of explaining or excusing this death. But surely Police Officers are trained to excercise control of their emotions, particularly so in the case of officers who are given access to firearms, or are our streets now patrolled by trigger-happy adrenalin junkies who believe that they are in some way above the law they are employed to uphold?

To shoot or not to shoot is a terrible decision to have to make and I do not envy anyone who is called upon to make it. But sadly, it is true that there are circumstances where such decisions are required. But these decisions are not made in a vacuum. The men charged with handling firearms are, supposedly, highly trained to cooly assess any given situation; not to indulge in the thrill of the chase and the consequent catharsis of the "Kill". In such highly charged situations there are rules that must be followed; rules put in place precisely to prevent the loss of innocent life. Shoot-to-kill should be an available option, but an option of last resort. Asking questions later puts each and every one of us on that tube train and places us all at equal risk from the force that is set up to protect us. To my mind, this is not an ideal recipe for a safe and civil society.

Doug and Tealeaf are quite right to point out that leaked information handed to the press must always be regarded with a degree of scepticism and must be weighed against what is already known. And they are also right to insist that we suspend judgement until all the facts are known and the report of the inquiry into the unfortunate young man's death is published.

But how many inquiries have we seen which were conducted, not to reveal the truth but, to hide it beneath a welter of legal argument and obfuscation?

17-08-2005, 19:37	#16
Acrylic-bob God Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Tragic Conn Posts: 4,007 Blog Entries: 15 Liked: 2 times Rep Power: 2470	Re: forget the terrorists, this is worse - much worse! I can accept mistaken identity right up until the moment when the young chap was challenged on the train and the officer sitting next to him pinned his arms to his side. It would have been a relatively simple matter then to take him off the train and find out who he was. But to shoot an already restrained suspect eleven times from extreme close range - and miss three times - does not strike me as a reasoned and measured response. One shot to the head from close range is enough to kill or severely disable anyone. Eleven shots speaks more of unreasoning and murderous frenzy. Think about it: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven shots! To stop one man, not two feet away? Much has been made of the sense of heightened tension in the days following the bombings as a means of explaining or excusing this death. But surely Police Officers are trained to excercise control of their emotions, particularly so in the case of officers who are given access to firearms, or are our streets now patrolled by trigger-happy adrenalin junkies who believe that they are in some way above the law they are employed to uphold? To shoot or not to shoot is a terrible decision to have to make and I do not envy anyone who is called upon to make it. But sadly, it is true that there are circumstances where such decisions are required. But these decisions are not made in a vacuum. The men charged with handling firearms are, supposedly, highly trained to cooly assess any given situation; not to indulge in the thrill of the chase and the consequent catharsis of the "Kill". In such highly charged situations there are rules that must be followed; rules put in place precisely to prevent the loss of innocent life. Shoot-to-kill should be an available option, but an option of last resort. Asking questions later puts each and every one of us on that tube train and places us all at equal risk from the force that is set up to protect us. To my mind, this is not an ideal recipe for a safe and civil society. Doug and Tealeaf are quite right to point out that leaked information handed to the press must always be regarded with a degree of scepticism and must be weighed against what is already known. And they are also right to insist that we suspend judgement until all the facts are known and the report of the inquiry into the unfortunate young man's death is published. But how many inquiries have we seen which were conducted, not to reveal the truth but, to hide it beneath a welter of legal argument and obfuscation? __________________ Enough is ENOUGH Get Britain out of Europe Last edited by Acrylic-bob; 17-08-2005 at 19:41.